I saw GasLand last night and was completely shocked by what is going on. The inaction by politicians and policy makers as well as the seeming cover up by Environmental Agencies makes me sick.

4:02 pm June 22, 2010

Merle wrote:

I get tired of people complaining about the energy our country is so dependent upon, but not having any viable solutions. If Mr. Fox views natural gas as a dirty pollutant, what is his solution to our country's massive demand of these fuels?

4:21 pm June 22, 2010

babs wrote:

@Merle, I understand what you are saying, but I don't think the movie was about all gas drilling, rather about this newer method of fracking that is being used and has proven to be an unsafe way to get the gas. I live in an area that they are trying to do this process and it is horrifying. If you saw what has happened to these people, and the value of their homes, it would make more sense. I do believe we need to take better steps in producing more renewable energy in the future, but that doesn't mean natural gas and oil will not be a part of that, I just would like to see safe gurards put in place to protect, people, animals and the environment. I think if we could access these energy sources in a safer way, people would not be complaining so much.

4:28 pm June 22, 2010

John wrote:

It's too bad that most of the "facts" in this documentary are either false or simply made up.

4:32 pm June 22, 2010

Jefferson wrote:

@babs
Hasn't hydraulic fracking been around for 60 years? Also, is the movie attacking fracking or the fact that naturally occuring methane is seeping (not due to drilling) into well water?

4:49 pm June 22, 2010

Penelope wrote:

Mr. Fox is appearing to be the next Michael Moore. I just hope that the viewers won't take everything he claims as gospel since it falls in line with what people in Hollywood believe. I also think it is funny how bad people hate and blame corporations every time something goes wrong. I wonder how many of these people are unemployed, feeling entitled to be making more money, or wish their companies treated them better. Guess what, if we started creating incentives for corporations rather than against them, maybe our unemployment would start to finally go down. The so-called educated ones are also the most ignorant.

5:02 pm June 22, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

@Jefferson, yes, it's been around, I think, since the 1940's. I think the problem is that now they are doing in close to the water wells on peoples land. In the past, this was done in remote areas and didn't quite have the same effects as it is now (or maybe know one knew of them). There is definitely something going on between where they are drilling and the homes that are getting methane into the water. All I say, is that when anything is controversial, and it appears, this procedure has always been considered that, and people are truly suffering, then someone should look into it before doing any further drilling. I guess that is what I meant. I always try to think of myself in someone else's shoes.

5:03 pm June 22, 2010

babs wrote:

@Jefferson, yes, it’s been around, I think, since the 1940’s. I think the problem is that now they are doing in close to the water wells on peoples land. In the past, this was done in remote areas and didn’t quite have the same effects as it is now (or maybe know one knew of them). There is definitely something going on between where they are drilling and the homes that are getting methane into the water. All I say, is that when anything is controversial, and it appears, this procedure has always been considered that, and people are truly suffering, then someone should look into it before doing any further drilling. I guess that is what I meant. I always try to think of myself in someone else’s shoes.

5:05 pm June 22, 2010

babs wrote:

oopppsss. the anonymous comment was mine

5:10 pm June 22, 2010

Ben Brown wrote:

@Jefferson Fracking has been around for 60 years, with in recent years a massive increase in it's use with little to no technical advancement in environmental safety. Natural gas can be extracted safely but it is very expensive and that doesn't work well with the anti-capitalist commu-fascist economic model that ALL U.S. energy companies use.

5:18 pm June 22, 2010

Will wrote:

Think about it... If the government ran the EPA like they run Homeland Security, we would have BP CEO Tony Hayward pictured as the Ace of Spades on a deck of cards.

5:52 pm June 22, 2010

frac facts wrote:

Hydraulic fracing is but one of the dirty secrets of this industry. Out of zone fracs are a well known problem for field services companies. This means that the fractures and the frac fluids go places where they were not intended to go, setting up a perfect contamination scenario and causing gas to flow away from the wellhead. One of Halliburton's marketing tools is to say there are ways to minimize these problems. But, industry heads testify there are no problems to solve or for EPA to study. Who to believe?

For your reading pleasure, Google: out of zone frac Halliburton . For fun, try to find this quote from Halliburton:

"The more efficient a frac fluid, the trickier it is to control in a given reservoir, even when being extremely precise with stimulation pumping pressures and application durations. Many in the industry believe that high-efficiency frac fluids also can generate a lot of out-of-zone growth of the fracture."

6:07 pm June 22, 2010

Penelope wrote:

@frac facts, should I Wikipedia it or Google it? Or maybe Steve Jobs or Bill Gates or James Cameron would be better resources. Talk about Liberal Lobbyists.

6:10 pm June 22, 2010

Penelope wrote:

@Ben Brown, can you explain your anti-capitalist commu-fasciest economic model? I would consider most if not all energy companies as capitalists (well as much as the government will let them be capitalists)...

6:59 pm June 22, 2010

John wrote:

I thank God that Josh has got this out there. Between mega oil spills and this, what more do we need to wake up. Seems like we need smart regulations to deal with practices like this and not fewer. We need someone looking out for safe drinking water and clean air. Big companies have been running away with things and are still making US citizens sick in 2010. I guess we have to wait until people are getting sick in wealthy suburbs before there's enough momentum.

8:19 pm June 22, 2010

Brewtalboyz wrote:

I continue to be completely amazed by people in denial. How can anyone watch that documentary and come up with some of the comments (John and Jefferson) Hello??? Hydrofracking can be safe but not when you add 593 chemicals to the process!!! I had my well fracked - WATER only. If that movie doesn't get Washington DC's attention...all of us on the East Coast will soon be experiencing the complete destruction we see out in the mid-West. The damage to humans and the environment has only just begun due to Greed, Greed, Greed. Bush, Cheney, his 'environmental affairs' staff should all be jailed. But don't be fooled. Corporations run this country and don't care one bit about humanity and certainly not the environment.

8:56 pm June 22, 2010

babs wrote:

Well said Brewtalboyz..thank you

9:03 pm June 22, 2010

cr wrote:

Does anyone have a better process for natural gas drilling? I don't think so. Merle, John and Jefferson you are absolutely right. This country is completely dependent on Oil & Gas and Coal industries. The technology to sustain this country completely on renewable energy is not and will not be developed anytime in the near future. Please make sure you know all the facts before completely judging based on one film.
For those of you who object so much turn off your lights, stoves and heaters and stop purchasing gasoline and other product made from petrochemicals. Go ahead and put up enough wind turbines and damns to produce hydro power to run an entire country and let me know how that works out for you.

9:16 pm June 22, 2010

FPL wrote:

BP has the worst safety record in the busines and everybody knew that, including the
government, but they still gave them permition to drill and now look the disaster we have.
We'll never learn because we like to reproduce like rats and we all need to drive a big old cars and have a
big old house and be warm in the winter and cold in the summer and not until gas goes up to $6.00 a gallon will we stop.
Until we change or curtail our need for energy we will be at the mercy of them all...

9:31 pm June 22, 2010

Linda wrote:

Josh Fox....you're my new hero. I thought this situation was going to be swept under the rug but thanks to your film we have a chance to make the country wake up and smell the fracking fluid. I am one of the appalled New Yorkers who the gas companies plan to get up close and personal with if they can. Now I have a glimmer of hope that someone....everyone will not let that happen.
Thank you very much for your hard work.

9:39 pm June 22, 2010

Michelle wrote:

For all those who believe this is liberal hogwash, how do you explain the wish's then execution of laws so companies wish's to be exempt from national clean water, air, etc. laws and any type of outside regulation with teeth were enacted?

9:41 pm June 22, 2010

Linda wrote:

Penelope, who do you work for....Cabot? Nornew? Are you stoned? I would bet my life you don't live accross the road from a gas well, dearie. YDKS

9:56 pm June 22, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Merle wrote:
I get tired of people complaining about the energy our country is so dependent upon, but not having any viable solutions. If Mr. Fox views natural gas as a dirty pollutant, what is his solution to our country’s massive demand of these fuels?
Merle....you don't know what this is about, clearly. I live near Dimock Pa. The film hit the nail on the head exactly. I welcome you, wherever you are from, to witness this first hand then stand by your comments. We, as a country, (to answer your query) have been dicking around with oil and gas far longer than is reasonably safe. We put men on the moon and can visually chat in real time with someone on the other side of the world, yet, as a people we are numb and blind to what is happening to our environment. I have seen with my own eyes, what is happening to the Northeast and yes, I live here, and yes, I am sickened and terrified by it all because I am now on the list of areas that are targeted for hydrofracking. FYI. Hydrofracking in deep shale is what is the danger. It allows the gas to migrate wherever. I don't need chemicals in my water, thank you. If this doesn't trouble you, watch the movie again and this time, have an open mind.
P.S. I don't personally give a rats about the price of gas for your Hummers, people. I would rather see government dollars used to develop clean renewable energy like DUH... Solar. WAs everybody drugged in the 70s when we were sitting on gas lines?
Another PS. If we could power vehicles with natural gas extracted from vertical wells which have been drilled around the country for over a hundred years, that would be on thing, but thanks to our former VP who personally designed the energy rules for the gas industry (thank you Mr. Halliburton) so as to not have them apply to his buddies in the natural gas business, they are now doing it the quickest and most dangerous way possible. There should be no gas extraction from shale PERIOD. I

5:50 am June 23, 2010

Kyle wrote:

The answer to this is to then icnrease the regulations. Anonymous, like it or not, we need fossil fuels. The "We put a man on the Moon" argument doesn't fly. The science to do "clean renewable energy" just is not there. We can't legislate it into existence. We can't cure cancer or AIDS right now either, or even poverty.

So fossil fuels are here to stay. The big issue is to make sure that the companies drilling for them comply with regulations.

I recently attended a convention where I learned of the impact of the fracing of natural gas in Arkansas. I sat there the whole time with my mouth open as I watched the slides presented by a woman who has taken on the task of getting some legal protection from this process into law-she is not having much success in Arkansas. Mr. Cheney's energy secrecy talks in the White House put a lot of this in motion because his policy approved by the Republican Congress allowed these Natural Gas companies to be exempt from several environmental laws already on the books. Many Americans are suffering from this now, and it looks like this will continue as long as people have their heads in the sand. Soon we will be looking for alternative sources for water.

1:49 pm June 23, 2010

Najiggles wrote:

I watch the documentary and was completely blown away. What I don't think people realize is that this isn't just about making money, this is about population reduction.Please read or get information on Global 2000.

4:54 pm June 23, 2010

Jay wrote:

I am a very proud employee of an operator in PA that drills Marcellus wells. There is a lot of bad information floating around "Gasland" that is not stating all of the facts. What happened in Dimock, PA was not good and i cant imagine being a landowner and having to deal with that! Before the Marcellus took off there have been thousands of wells drilled in this state and if cemented properly gas will not migrate to drinking water. In my home town there is an entire school district that runs the buildings and all the buses off Natural gas from wells drilled right next to the schools. They have been doing it for 30 years! Most likely there are wells near your homes that you dont even know about. And guess what, most likely there is a water well near it and im sure its not contaminated. Did you know that the state of PA puts more salt on the road every year than if 4,000 Marcellus wells spilled flowback water all at the same time!!

Last but not least i get really tired of hearing about all the record breaking profits of Big Oil. I didnt know it was a crime to make a profit. We had no problem throwing billions at GM and Chrysler. If the Oil companies go belly up would the government bail them out?

5:43 pm June 23, 2010

Randy wrote:

The vast majority of the claims in Gasland are false. Living in the middle of one of the areas discussed (N Tx), there are no significant problems being created. Fracturing wells has been done for decades, in thousands of wells, with no documented cases of ground water contamination in TX. Pure nonsense.

5:57 pm June 23, 2010

anonymous wrote:

http://www.energyindepth.org/2010/06/debunking-gasland/. The COGCC regulates all gas wells and they have some of the strictest regulations before anyone can drill just to get a permit. The link gives the rest of the story that the movie cuts out. Of course it only show parts you can make anything look bad if you only show one side and not the results of the investigations. People do your own research before placing the blame.

6:00 pm June 23, 2010

Ed wrote:

Kyle,

you are absolutely right about the science to do 'clean, renewable energy' not being there - although it should be pursued.

Where a concentrated man-in-the-moon effort IS warranted though, is in restarting our hibernating nuclear energy industry. People have such a knee jerk reaction to the technology - making a fuel source marginalized that is MILLIONS of times more dense than any conceivable fossil fuel, and has decades of an impressive safety record.

So, before you too have a knee reaction to the technology, just think of the consequences of the concentrated energy source:

1. lower land footprint of any technology (including wind and solar)
2. lower - or on parity - lifecycle CO2 costs than any technology
3. ability to be on demand and to work in current electrical networks.
4. lower material use than any other source by an order of magnitude (including wind and solar)
5. ability to PRODUCE (using fischer-tropsch) fossil fuels up to high quality jet fuel.

I'll go this far - if we do NOT pursue this (as the Chinese are doing right now at warp speed) then we will be marginalized as a nation in the coming decades.

You don't have a choice - you do NOT turn a blind-eye to mother nature. Spin may work in boardrooms and on TV sets, but we are at this very moment paying for our ignorance, and in the future we will pay in spades unless we amend our ways.

Ed

10:59 pm June 23, 2010

Go Gasland! wrote:

This show was riveting; not because it was a polished professional piece, but in spite of it.
Kudos to this young man for the guts and stamina to give us a glimpse of the tip of the iceberg.
Here's the part where we should all become outraged and inspired to act and save our country (for a change).
I love luxuries as much as the next guy but I could learn to cut back and make better choices.
Lets separate the politicians from the corporations so they can do the same.
Who & how do I contact to make a diffference?

11:28 pm June 23, 2010

Go Gasland! wrote:

My comments are not meant to bring about a debate on something we all know too little about.
This is a serious problem that needs to be addressed on many levels. I advocate these very serious "allegations" be addressed with the same urgency the government and politicians would demand for there own families. Every story has 2 sides lets hear both in layperson terms. In the mean time anyone with serious doubts may want to change their vacation plans this summer and maybe stop by some of those folks homes for "lemonade" or maybe drop a "fishin" line in. You can decide for yourself.

Facts on flaming tap water, while interesting, does not explain away the other human and environmental dilemmas. The bottom line is; it needs to be investigated by an unbiased party and then the blame can be dealt out. In the mean time who of you want to live there. I am many states away but I am not foolish enough to think eventually it won't trickle down to me.

I can't understand why anybody would believe an independent filmmaker over a public relations firm hired by the gas industry!! What could be more believable than people paid to make the gas industry look good??

10:35 am June 24, 2010

Karl wrote:

Well, I have looked at the film and articles proclaiming inaccuracies and frankly, I wouldn't live on any of this property or drink any of the water. Would you? Additionally, if the residents' claims are not true, why are the gas companies supplying fresh drinking water to them in cisterns and through water purification. Is this done out of the goodness of their corporate hearts? I live on a working farm and I invest in corporations. Seems to me that many of these corporations are in league with the agencies that are supposed to regulate them. Anytime that situation occurs, the consumer or shareholder is going to lose. Wall St. meltdown, AIG, Gulf oil spill, unemployment and job loss, heard of any of these things? Oh, I was relieved to see that one of the fishkills was caused by improper coal mining instead of gas drilling. That makes me feel a whole lot friendlier to fossil fuels.

11:23 am June 24, 2010

Ann wrote:

Forty years ago we put men on the moon, but we still have figured out how to affordably collect and store solar and wind power. Why is that? Because the oil and gas industry hasn’t figured out how to make that profitable. My utopian dream is a solar energy generator on every roof that powers everything. No drilling, no pipelines, no transmission lines, no grid. Every building for itself. Meantime, my neighbors and I who live on the shale are fighting the drillers with everything we’ve got. And BTW, vertical fracking has been around for decades, but what they’re doing up here is horizontal fracking. Drilling down a mile and then turning the drill 90 degrees and drilling a few more miles. That’s the big Halliburton invention but it only works if you pour a few million gallons of water down the well with it, laced with several hundred thousand gallons of toxins. What hath God wrought indeed.

12:06 pm June 24, 2010

anonymous wrote:

Solor and wind are great. But how many solor panel are need to sustain one town. How many wind turbines.
Would you want one in your back yard? Most manufacturers of utility-scale turbines offer machines in the 700-kW to 2.5-MW range. Ten 700-kW units would make a 7-MW wind plant, while 10 2.5-MW machines would make a 25-MW facility. In the future, machines of larger size will be available, although they will probably be installed offshore, where larger transportation and construction equipment can be used. Units up to 5 MW in capacity are now under development.resources

Wind Web Tutorial

WIND ENERGY BASICS
What is wind energy? How many turbines does it take to make one megawatt (MW)?

What is a wind turbine
and how does it work? How many homes can one megawatt of wind serve?

What are wind
turbines made of? What is a wind power plant?

How big is a wind turbine? What is "capacity factor"?

How much electricity can
one wind turbine generate? If a wind turbine's capacity factor is 33%, doesn't that mean it is only running one-third of the time?

What is "availability factor"?

What is wind energy?

In reality, wind energy is a converted form of solar energy. The sun's radiation heats different parts of the earth at different rates-most notably during the day and night, but also when different surfaces (for example, water and land) absorb or reflect at different rates. This in turn causes portions of the atmosphere to warm differently. Hot air rises, reducing the atmospheric pressure at the earth's surface, and cooler air is drawn in to replace it. The result is wind.

Air has mass, and when it is in motion, it contains the energy of that motion("kinetic energy"). Some portion of that energy can converted into other forms mechanical force or electricity that we can use to perform work.

More reading:
“Where Does Wind Energy Come From”
and its subsections contain a very extensive description of the various geographical and geophysical factors that drive the circulation of the winds around our planet.

TOP

What is a wind turbine and how does it work?

A wind energy system transforms the kinetic energy of the wind into mechanical or electrical energy that can be harnessed for practical use. Mechanical energy is most commonly used for pumping water in rural or remote locations- the "farm windmill" still seen in many rural areas of the U.S. is a mechanical wind pumper - but it can also be used for many other purposes (grinding grain, sawing, pushing a sailboat, etc.). Wind electric turbines generate electricity for homes and businesses and for sale to utilities.

There are two basic designs of wind electric turbines: vertical-axis, or "egg-beater" style, and horizontal-axis (propeller-style) machines. Horizontal-axis wind turbines are most common today, constituting nearly all of the "utility-scale" (100 kilowatts, kW, capacity and larger) turbines in the global market.

TOP

Turbine subsystems include:

a rotor, or blades, which convert the wind's energy into rotational shaft energy;
a nacelle (enclosure) containing a drive train, usually including a gearbox* and a generator;
a tower, to support the rotor and drive train; and
electronic equipment such as controls, electrical cables, ground support equipment, and interconnection equipment.
*Some turbines do not require a gearbox

Wind turbines vary in size. This chart depicts a variety of historical turbine sizes and the amount of electricity they are each capable of generating (the turbine's capacity, or power rating).

The electricity generated by a utility-scale wind turbine is normally collected and fed into utility power lines, where it is mixed with electricity from other power plants and delivered to utility customers. Today (August 2005), turbines with capacities as large as 5,000 kW (5 MW) are being tested.

More reading:
Wind Energy—How Does It Work? is a fact sheet that gives additional basic information about wind energy in the U.S.

Wind Energy Technology .

TOP

What are wind turbines made of?

The towers are mostly tubular and made of steel. The blades are made of fiberglass-reinforced polyester or wood-epoxy.

How big is a wind turbine?

Utility-scale wind turbines for land-based wind farms come in various sizes, with rotor diameters ranging from about 50 meters to about 90 meters, and with towers of roughly the same size. A 90-meter machine, definitely at the large end of the scale at this writing (2005), with a 90-meter tower would have a total height from the tower base to the tip of the rotor of approximately 135 meters (442 feet).

Offshore turbine designs now under development will have larger rotors—at the moment, the largest has a 110-meter rotor diameter—because it is easier to transport large rotor blades by ship than by land.

Small wind turbines intended for residential or small business use are much smaller. Most have rotor diameters of 8 meters or less and would be mounted on towers of 40 meters in height or less.

How much electricity can one wind turbine generate?

The ability to generate electricity is measured in watts. Watts are very small units, so the terms kilowatt (kW, 1,000 watts), megawatt (MW, 1 million watts), and gigawatt (pronounced "jig-a-watt," GW, 1 billion watts) are most commonly used to describe the capacity of generating units like wind turbines or other power plants.

Electricity production and consumption are most commonly measured in kilowatt-hours (kWh). A kilowatt-hour means one kilowatt (1,000 watts) of electricity produced or consumed for one hour. One 50-watt light bulb left on for 20 hours consumes one kilowatt-hour of electricity (50 watts x 20 hours = 1,000 watt-hours = 1 kilowatt-hour).

The output of a wind turbine depends on the turbine's size and the wind's speed through the rotor. Wind turbines being manufactured now have power ratings ranging from 250 watts to 5 megawatts (MW).

Example: A 10-kW wind turbine can generate about 10,000 kWh annually at a site with wind speeds averaging 12 miles per hour, or about enough to power a typical household. A 5-MW turbine can produce more than 15 million kWh in a year--enough to power more than 1, 400 households. The average U.S. household consumes about 10,000 kWh of electricity each year.

Example: A 250-kW turbine installed at the elementary school in Spirit Lake, Iowa, provides an average of 350,000 kWh of electricity per year, more than is necessary for the 53,000-square-foot school. Excess electricity fed into the local utility system earned the school $25,000 in its first five years of operation. The school uses electricity from the utility at times when the wind does not blow. This project has been so successful that the Spirit Lake school district has since installed a second turbine with a capacity of 750 kW. (For further information on this project, see at the Web site of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.)

Wind speed is a crucial element in projecting turbine performance, and a site's wind speed is measured through wind resource assessment prior to a wind system's construction. Generally, an annual average wind speed greater than four meters per second (m/s) (9 mph) is required for small wind electric turbines (less wind is required for water-pumping operations). Utility-scale wind power plants require minimum average wind speeds of 6 m/s (13 mph).

The power available in the wind is proportional to the cube of its speed, which means that doubling the wind speed increases the available power by a factor of eight. Thus, a turbine operating at a site with an average wind speed of 12 mph could in theory generate about 33% more electricity than one at an 11-mph site, because the cube of 12 (1,768) is 33% larger than the cube of 11 (1,331). (In the real world, the turbine will not produce quite that much more electricity, but it will still generate much more than the 9% difference in wind speed.) The important thing to understand is that what seems like a small difference in wind speed can mean a large difference in available energy and in electricity produced, and therefore, a large difference in the cost of the electricity generated. Also, there is little energy to be harvested at very low wind speeds (6-mph winds contain less than one-eighth the energy of 12-mph winds).

TOP

How many turbines does it take to make one megawatt (MW)?

Most manufacturers of utility-scale turbines offer machines in the 700-kW to 2.5-MW range. Ten 700-kW units would make a 7-MW wind plant, while 10 2.5-MW machines would make a 25-MW facility. In the future, machines of larger size will be available, although they will probably be installed offshore, where larger transportation and construction equipment can be used. Units up to 5 MW in capacity are now under development.

How many homes can one megawatt of wind energy supply?

An average U.S. household uses about 10,655 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity each year. One megawatt of wind energy can generate from 2.4 to more than 3 million kWh annually. Therefore, a megawatt of wind generates about as much electricity as 225 to 300 households use. It is important to note that since the wind does not blow all of the time, it cannot be the only power source for that many households without some form of storage system.
Think of how many Homes there are around the world.

12:10 pm June 24, 2010

anonymous wrote:

Solar Power
In the desert of southern Spain, 20 miles outside Seville, more than 1,000 mirrors are being carefully positioned. Each is about half the size of a tennis court, so the adjustments will take time. But when they are complete in a few weeks, it will mark a major moment in the quest for renewable energy.

The mirrors are part of the world's biggest solar tower plant, a technology that reflects sunlight to superheat water at a central tower. Once this €80m (£67m) plant is inaugurated in January, it will generate 20MW of electricity, enough to power 11,000 Spanish homes.
How much room do we need. It all has to work together and balance between Natual gas, oil, coal, solar and wind.
DO you now how many of your every day products have OIl based material in them. The medical industry, your cars, lipsticks, toys... etc. TV's and phone uses rare minerals in there development.

12:52 pm June 24, 2010

JTriad wrote:

Despite all the things it has going for it, the gas industry has managed to create enemies virtually everywhere throughout the state. Both economically beneficial to Pennsylvania and to the entire nation, gas drilling had a head start on gaining public support. However, in wake of the recent debacles, few still view drilling in a positive light. It would seem a better PR strategy would have endeared gas drilling in the state, and the industry as a whole, to the public.

My husband and I viewed the documentary by Josh Fox. As professional journalism reporters, editors, and university professors, we applaud Josh's efforts to expose the egregious fraud perpetrated on U.S. citizens. We are distraught that nothing is to be done because those evil-doers are psycho-paths and are moving forward with their next weapon of mass destruction. Those who voted for Bush-Cheney are to blame, as they lead the packs, and the pervasive damage may never be undone. My usual optimism has worn thin.

Living in Texas and working in the oil and gas industry. I found it amazing how many out right lies and misinformation existed in this movie. Mr. Fox obviously did little to no research in the functions of those wells and how they are actually operated, but simply made things up from lay observations. For one it is not as if there is a well on every 100 feet as the movie made it seem. States have regulations on where wells can be drilled (e.g., one well per every 60 acres of land). The people who are on here applauding his efforts should be ashamed of supporting this film. Then again you are probably the kind of people that believe everything they hear and read. So what's the point.

9:50 am June 25, 2010

Jim Robinson wrote:

Mr. Fox, I want to thank you for "gasland". it was really eye opening.since seeing gasland i`ve been researching where they Fracture Drill. I have noticed that the northern portion of Michigan, has many Frac drilling sites. this is particularly scary,if the toxins they use for frac drilling,are getting to the water supply, for many in Pa. I can`t imagine what will happen if it bleeds into Lake Michigan. over 40 million people drink water everyday, through their cities, townships, municipalities.from Lake Michigan. wow! thanks again for the movie. just call me scared in Illinois.

11:40 am June 25, 2010

SolarBabySolar wrote:

This movie is eye-opening and moving. I am still amazed that people are able to completely dismiss it as lies just because they work on, own or are tied to some natural gas/oil based operation. It's great to make a buck, but when all of the good drinking water is gone, don't expect to be able to drink those dollars you stuffed into your pockets. WAKE UP Ryan!!

12:45 pm June 25, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

The gas industry has set up a site to debunk Gasland, called Energy In Depth.org, but it rings hollow given the oil industry's track record as of late and uh, that guy's flaming kitchen faucet.

1:54 pm June 25, 2010

Susie wrote:

To the pro-natural gas crowd: Exactly what reason(s) do we have for NOT believing everything in Josh Fox's courageous documentary? Do you think he hired actors to play the roles of the exploited? Totally agree with the last comment: the EID "debunking' rings completely hollow and disingenuous.

Also, tell me why it is okay for a select few people to get filthy rich off the misery and pain of others?

2:15 pm June 25, 2010

Toni wrote:

Ryan, if we get someone that was in the film to send you a jar of water....will you dirink it?

3:13 pm June 25, 2010

MK wrote:

It was troublesome to watch this and see all the bad things that happened to these people by the Gas Companies, but I also think one thing lost in this movie is that it is politicians themselves who grant these powers, where Josh Fox primarily blames it on Dick Cheney like he held a gun to everyone's head, and he seemedd to have a bent on the Republicans only. Whereas, to pass the Energy Bill of 2005 he references in his movie that gives the gas companies an exemption on the Clean Water Act one can just look up who voted for it, it has to pass the House of Reps and the Senate then get signed by the President into law, so one cannot blame one person alone. Even Obama voted 'yes' for this 2005 Energy Bill that Josh cites that gave the gas companies the exemption from the Clean Water Act. THe movie shed a light though on something that is very troublesome and sickening to know that it is happening to people, animals, water, etc.http://www.citizen.org/cmep/article_redirect.cfm?ID=13980

3:59 pm June 25, 2010

CommonSense wrote:

I suspect many of the natural gas naysayers are also anti-coal and -nuke. This means that they (as Josh Fox has said about his views) advocate for exclusive use of renewable energy. Just a few problems with this.

1) Wind and solar are intermittent and cannot be used for baseload power. To get to geothermal energy, companies would have - gasp - drill! Then there's biomass, but some say that burning biomass is more harmful than burning coal in terms of emissions.

2) Battery storage tech doesn't exist. There's no way to capture and store the meager amounts of solar and wind energy that could be provided for use at times when it's not sunny or windy.

3) Transmission. Anyone know how long it takes to build (or more appropriately, obtain permission to build) transmission lines? In order to transfer renewable energy from the source to where it's needed, thousands of miles of transmission lines would have to be constructed across America. That means obtaining permission from every locality, county, state, etc. through which a line must pass in order to serve some other population center that could be on the other side of the country. How many NIMBYs, BANANAs and bat protectors are going to altruistically not oppose power line construction if they aren't the direct recipients of the renewable energy (hell, how many would not oppose them even if they were the recipients?)?

Going from one dirty fossil fuel, oil, to another, natural gas, isn't the answer. Drilling for gas, "fracking" is putting deadly toxic chemicals in the nation's water supply. Watch the video. RENEWABLE ENERGY IS THE ANSWER.

4:44 pm June 25, 2010

Randy wrote:

'Gasland' is like one of those movies 'proving' we didn't land on the moon, etc. It would be easy for one of these folks to PROVE the gas coming out of their faucet was the result of fracturing - natural gas can be precisely 'fingerprinted' as to the different components and isotopes contained. It sounds like the state agency did that and found out it was NOT gas from the deeper formation, but shallow gas unrelated to the gas producers' activities. Of course, that doesn't make for a good, heart-tugging story.

And it is stunning that, on the verge of a revolution in energy supply that will greatly reduce imports, put people to work, reduce and greatly greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal and fuel oil, this joker has come up with a movie that scares people into stopping that very thing. Unbelievable!

5:09 pm June 25, 2010

Randy wrote:

Just to put it in perspective, there are over 13,000 shale gas wells in north Texas, may under developed areas and subdivisions from the DFW airport, throughout Ft. Worth, and points west and north. I have lived here thoughout the drilling period, and have seen no issues associated with groundwater. The issues that exist relate to noise, truck traffic on rual roads, and air pollution, all just during the drilling process, and all that are worked through with the companies involved. Once the wells are drilled and on production, these things drop way off.

The biggest complaint? That the drop in gas prices resulted in a dropoff in drilling, reducing payments to all those happy landowners.

6:17 pm June 25, 2010

Tim wrote:

while working for Halliburton in south america i came down with severe neuropathy in many organs - water pollution-breathing heavy metals-viral infection no one can say -BUT-many chemicals were in use. i have been compensated somewhat but my health sucks, all i can say if one injects/breathes bad chemicals in ones body or mother earth itself -at some point big problems occur....like death of ones self or the planet as we know it.........

7:18 pm June 25, 2010

Ryan wrote:

So let me get this straight. Y'all are attacking my comment and taking someone else's word on something that they minimum knowledge about and made ridiculous assumptions from a passerby view. Have any of you ever been out the very same wells that Mr. Fox showed in his movie? I thought not. I HAVE. I am in no way advocating that there needs to be more regulation with certain methods of drilling, but until there is a more reasonably cost effective means of extraction it will likely not change unless you would all like to start paying half your paychecks for gas for your car and power for your home. Furthermore, "frac-ing" which is what Mr. Fox's assertions of pollution by oil and gas companies stems from, is not as heavily used as he made it seem. Also, all those allegedly injured interviewees from the drilling are all near well operations. As a result, they all have valid reasons to be disgruntled; as I said earlier there are restrictions on where wells can be drilled (e.g. one well per every 60 acres), so if their neighboring land owner leased the land for mineral exploration first they are SOL if they are within that 60 acre radius. I would be pretty jealous if my neighbor became a millionaire because he picked up the phone first too.

12:02 pm June 26, 2010

peggy wrote:

Next I want to hear about the health of all those people in oil producing countries where such a film could not exixt. And for tht matter, where are the 596 chemicals being produced and how are the neighbors of these wonderful factories doing? What is the current statis of the fracing bill in legislature and how can I help? What can I do? I love my country and my car, but I love my children too.

12:18 pm June 26, 2010

Daniel wrote:

To those lying about this film, trying to debunk the truth about fracking, lying is a sin. You goto hell for this sin. some sins cannot be forgiven. While you'll fool half of this gullible country, you cannot fool the lord. The lord shall judge you as such.

1:52 pm June 26, 2010

Linda wrote:

Thank you for making this film. If there is an "axis of evil" it is Halliburton & Dick Cheney. Have you thought of working with Michael Moore to expose more of the lies the government is telling us... actually NOT telling us? The EPA needs to be investigated.
By the way did that exemption pass?

1:59 pm June 26, 2010

Peg wrote:

Obviously the film was edited to present an anti fracking view, but that does not mean that further investigation is not required. Get rid of all lobby money now, do some more independent research.
Do not try to debunk this film by giving us information that is supported from the other side. Find some independent research agency that does not get cash from a third party to have their agenda pushed.

2:40 am June 27, 2010

Andy wrote:

Have the critics actually watched this? If so, really? What are you actually disputing here?

This is horrible indefensible evil and Halliburton deserves the corporate death penalty.

9:55 am June 28, 2010

Pattie wrote:

After watching GASLAND last night and with the BP debacle still going strong I feel so overwhelmed by the evil of corporate greed in this country. How ironic the Richard Nixon was the last US President to really do anything to take care of the water and air in this country. Shame on all the other Presidents, including Obama who I voted for. There just has to be a special place in hell for Dick Cheney and his minions!

3:14 pm June 28, 2010

In the Middle wrote:

As you read these comments please remember that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Until we have another mass extinction or get renewables figured out we are reliant on fossil fuels. Maybe the next mass extinction will come at the hands of fossil fuels. After reading most of these comments that is what I am hoping for.

3:37 pm June 28, 2010

Randy wrote:

"corporate death penalty"..."lying is a sin"..."you go to hell"
Amazing over-reaction, don't you think? About 2 MILLION people live directly over the Barnett shale production, with only the problems I previously mentioned. Should gas drilling be regulated and carefully monitored? Yes, it is, and more is certainly to come. Is it something born of 'corporate evil', to be banned? That would be no different than banning the automobile because of traffic deaths, or banning air travel because they occaisionally crash. That folks are taking 'Gasland' at face value, with no thought that it is a one-sided hatchet job, is unfortunate.

7:44 am June 29, 2010

mike mcmackin wrote:

the real issue,unfortunately for the gas and oil industry,is the fresh water. water is sacred water is the number one resource.without fresh water there is no life,country,or nation.in pa. people have a constitutional right under article 1 section 27 as written the people have a right to clean air.pure water and the preservation of the natural scenic,historic and esthetic values of the environment.thank you.

12:41 pm June 29, 2010

michelle marie wrote:

The level at which this atrocity is occurring across our country is mind boggling.

THESE ARE OUR NATIONS MOST THREATENING PREDATORS and ENVIRONMENTAL TERRORISTS.

It doesn't matter where you live, this affects us all.

12:51 pm June 29, 2010

Randy wrote:

So a technology which can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, reduce oil imports from contries home to REAL terrorists, and put Americans to work is the product of 'our nations most threatening predators'? Amazing, simply amazing.

1:00 pm June 29, 2010

michelle marie wrote:

Yes sir. The positive aspects you speak of are reduced to zero if there is no clean water.
No jobs no food, no life will be the result of such continued destruction to our waterways.

2:12 pm June 29, 2010

Randy wrote:

The idea that drilling these wells will destroy fresh water resouces is patently incorrect. Were it true, it would have already happened elsewhere, such at in Texas. It has not. While care has to be taken to avoid any spill of water and chemicals produced back initially, there is no case where fresh water reservoirs have been contaminated during the fracturing process. To think that drilling these wells will destroy, or affect in a significant way, the fresh water resources of an area is simply incorrect. There are multiple state and federal agencies that are actively insuring that will not happen. I think it is criminal that 'Gasland' has instilled such fears in well-meaning people.

4:22 pm June 29, 2010

michelle marie wrote:

As shown in video, numerous real life accounts of the deterioration in peoples animals, health, and water has already happened with no assistance or help from said multiple state and federal agencies or the companies doing the drilling for suffering already incurred. Exactly how are said multiple state and federal agencies or the drilling companies supposed to remove the known chemicals used in drilling for natural gas from the water? There are still chemicals left in the air, land and water, which for many is the bottom line issue. No disrespect to those however well informed or well meaning supporters of this industry.

4:23 pm June 29, 2010

Gary wrote:

Randy is right. Gasland is a smear job that is based on false and/or incomplete information.

4:45 pm June 29, 2010

Randy wrote:

Here are some facts, straight from the state regulators in charge of ground water protection:

NEW YORK: “I think is clear that when put into the proper
context and perspective, the reported information shows that
the incidence of spills and other pollution events at modern
naturlal gas well sites is exceedingly low …” (Alexander B.
“Pete” Grannis, commissioner of NY DEC, 12/30/09)

TEXAS: “Though hydraulic fracturing has been used for over 50
years in Texas, our records do not indicate a single documented
contamination case associated with hydraulic fracturing.”
(Texas Railroad Commission’s Victor Carrillo, 5/29/2009)

OHIO: “After 25 years of investigating citizen complaints of
contamination, [our] geologists have not documented a single
incident involving contamination of ground water attributed to
hydraulic fracturing.” (Scott Kell, deputy chief of Ohio DNR, 5/27/09)

NEW MEXICO: “[W]e have found no example of contamination of
usable water where the cause was claimed to be hydraulic fracturing.”
(Mark Fesmire, director of NM Oil Conservation Division, 5/29/09)

ALABAMA: “I can state with authority that there have been no
documented cases of drinking water contamination caused
by such hydraulic fracturing operations in our state.” (Barry H.
“Nick” Tew, Jr., Oil & Gas supervisor for Alabama, 5/27/09)

5:11 am June 30, 2010

Skeptic wrote:

How much are you getting paid, Randy?

5:26 am June 30, 2010

Skeptic wrote:

Where does the balance of power in this situation lay? The makers of this film and the people featured in it are being accused of fraud, deception, and slander. If not those things, they must be ignorant and everyone who sees the film and believes there is cause for concern is also ignorant and foolish. But what do those people have to gain from doing this? I suppose Josh Fox simply had nothing better to do.

And what do the energy companies have to gain from you believing the paid spillage of their supporters? Only the continued easy access to resources and government worth billions and billions. Randy, Ryan, ect... none of them are worth responding to.

6:30 am June 30, 2010

mike mcmackin wrote:

Untill someone once to take the time and money to map out and locate every fresh water aquifer,including the depth,then the statement made by PA.DEP SCOTT PERRY in regards to never direct contaminatin of fresh water in PA.or anywhere else will fall on deaf ears.I am tired of hearing how the oil and gas industry have been hydro fracking for the last 40,50,60years.The truth of the matter is,yes they have been,but only vertical wells useing small quanities of water and air.Marcellus deep hard shale gas welling is not the same.Millions of gallons of water laced with frack chemicals are used in this process.The 1% of the chemicals used and mixed in the water equate to an estimated 35 tons of solid toxic waste.AND THIS IS NOT FREAH WATER CONTAMINATION.Every Marcellus gas well is an evironmental tragedy from start to finsh. Thank You

6:44 am June 30, 2010

mike mcmackin wrote:

Untill someone once to take the time and money to map out and locate every fresh water aquifer,including the depth,then the statement made by PA.DEP SCOTT PERRY in regards to never direct contaminatin of fresh water in PA.or anywhere else will fall on deaf ears.I am tired of hearing how the oil and gas industry have been hydro fracking for the last 40,50,60years.The truth of the matter is,yes they have been,but only vertical wells useing small quanities of water and air.Marcellus deep hard shale gas drilling is not the same.Millions of gallons of water laced with frack chemicals are used in this process.The 1% of the chemicals used and mixed in the water equate to an estimated 35 tons of solid toxic waste.AND THIS IS NOT FREAH WATER CONTAMINATION.Every Marcellus gas well is an evironmental tragedy from start to finsh. Thank You

10:21 am June 30, 2010

Randy wrote:

Sorry if my facts do not agree with some folks opinions and accusations...and here are some more facts: fresh water aquifers are well known by regulators, they're a hugely valuable resource. The shale formations are thousands of feet below the fresh water formations, which are quite shallow. Again, thousands of these exact same type of wells have been drilled under two million people in Texas, with no, zero, nada contamination of fresh water aquifers from the fracturing process.

As to why folks would say what they do in the movie? Fear, of course, followed by greed and fame (the filmmakers). It's easy to fear something when you can't see what's going on thousands of feet below your feet, that's understandable. That doesn't make it right.

11:32 am June 30, 2010

Ginger wrote:

Is it possible that these state regulators have a conflict of interest? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I'm not willing to denouce this film as total BS either. If my water was flammable, I'd bark about it too - regardless if there was money/fame involved. If my perfectly good well exploded after Halliburton showed up 200yds from my property, I'd be asking questions. All of you would do the same. No doubt in my mind.

11:38 am June 30, 2010

Randy wrote:

Absolutely, I'd ask questions too. I'd then get a lawyer (they'll be happy to be involved in a case like this) and they'd get the gas sampled from my faucet and compare it to the gas coming out of the gas well. It is very straightforward to do this, and the results are like a fingerprint: which components are in which gas, and which isotopes are in which gas. This was done in some of the cases, and the gases were different-the gas coming out of the faucet was being formed 'biogenically', near the surface, probably in the aquifer, while the gas coming out of the gas well was not.

4:04 pm June 30, 2010

mike mcmackin wrote:

Sorry, but one problem that THE REGULATORS have is they do not know were all the aquifers are and they do not know in many cases the actual depths.The regulators do not know were my aquifers and private water wells are. Remember the water is the number one resource and is protected in my constitutional rights. Thank You

7:17 pm July 3, 2010

Ruth wrote:

If fracking is clean, then why the opposition on the part of the oil and gas industry to closing the loophole exempting them from following the standards set by the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts?

7:37 pm July 6, 2010

Bzierden wrote:

I finally watch the whole show of Gasland. I totally upset!! How dare that our government spends millions and millions of dollars on drilling for natural gas. When we can other sources. Like wind power and the sun. I think that they would work alot better than trying to force people off of there lands that they work so hard, and try making a decent living so they can pay their bills. Shame on Bush and Cheney!! How could they override a bill that was created by Nixon in 1972. We need to stand up to these a-holes!!! Otherwise, we will all perish once the water is all poisoned.

8:13 pm July 6, 2010

DesertDan wrote:

It's funny how many people on this board posted energy poorly veiled industry PR pieces to contradict Gasland. http://marketing-endeavors.com/wordpress/2010/07/06/gasland_energy_company_offensive/. Fox also never says that Natural Gas should be left out of ongoing efforts to reduce carbon emissions. What Gasland says is that the Gas Industry should not be exempt to the Clean Water Act and other environmental provisions that would allow even basic oversight of this fragmented process. The process of fracking has existed for decades but the expansion of it and the chemicals used to assist have not. Therefore, there need to be safeguards that are currently not there. Even if they were there, the EPA needs to be empowered and funded to quickly act upon violations, otherwise the next Deepwater Horizon could be in a cow pasture near you.

8:36 am July 7, 2010

mike mcmackin wrote:

The EPA and the DEC need to have new personal hired with a quality trait known as integrity.The amount of money levied in fines on the gas industry in Dimock Pa.was a joke.$250,000.00 for destroying 14 + homes water supplies,thats a slap on the wrist when you think that the estimated value of the extracted gas in Pa.alone is worth over 50 billion dollars a year. What about the decrease in value of those people and the other residents in the area real estate and loss of any home equity they might have. And about the cow pasture near you? You are right,check out the story in State College Pa. were 28 head of cattle possibly drank frack water from East Resources leaking open pit lagoon and the Dept.of Agriculture now have the cattle in quarantine. Not only are they contaminating our water but also are food. Thank You

4:41 pm July 8, 2010

Jesse wrote:

The biggest thing that this documentary shows is fundamental lack of trust that people have in the institutions in this country to protect them. We don't trust the government because its run by politicians who are bought and paid for by the industry. We don't trust the industry because as the economic crisis has shown, they only care about money. So when I see tap water catching fire, that makes a pretty powerful statement. If I trusted the government and big business to do the right thing, I might believe them when they say that its natural. But when I don't believe them, when they have a history not being reliable sources or accurate... a film like this just reinforces the fears that I already have.

11:05 am July 14, 2010

Randy wrote:

"tap water catching fire" was proven, after an actual investigation (as opposed to a 'documentary' that is light on actual documents or facts) to have nothing to do with the nearby gas production. But facts did not get in the way of "Gasland". There are few to be found in that movie.

11:33 pm July 14, 2010

Randy wrote:

Speaking of facts, Range Resources is now disclosing 100% of the chemicals used in fracturing their wells in the Marcellus Shale. They're one of the biggest producers. Look at their web site if you want actual information, as opposed to unsupported allegations and blatantly misleading statements. Ten (TEN) ingredients, nothing bizarre. It is amazing that a technology that has put BILLIONS of dollars in citizens' pockets through greatly reduced gas prices, with next to ZERO environmental impact, is being treated a some sort of scourge. Simply amazing.

3:18 pm July 21, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Randy, pull your head out of Cheney's ass.

6:09 pm July 21, 2010

unhappy camper wrote:

HMM,
$250.000 isn't even enough to replace two pieces of destroyed properties, and were did the money go?
You didn't think the gov gave to the poor people that got up rooted.
Now for speaking of facts who can prove they are telling the truth as for what they use, also why didn't tell us until now, why is that. Why do people need so much money to live? The gov takes 75% in taxes. Maybe this is to drive people to need the pennies offered by the big companies.
I say don't support a bad situation change it ,Josh has done more to bring this problem to light than anyone I know of he is a TRUE AMERICAN HERO and until someone else picks up the ball think before you pick at his effort

4:57 pm July 31, 2010

Disappointed wrote:

I am really depressed that John Stewart interviewed this guy and didn't attack his lack of facts.

2:24 pm August 2, 2010

Anne wrote:

The Republicans definitly stand out in their comments! Ryan in TX is going to back Bush/Chaney to HIS grave!! I love when people say Clinton lied! Yes he did, as would most men in his place. When he lied no one died, when Bush lied (Iraq-weapons of mass destruction) our men and women are still dying. American, please pull your heads out of your ass and stop the people that are destroying our world. Millionairs that don't care, corp. that just care about the bottom line, not the people that slave for them. Yes, Obama gave money to the car companies, to stop additional lay-offs. They have repaid there loans!! Gaslands is not a lie, it is part of corporate America. All that are against this, please write you congress people. You can find there addresses on line.

2:30 pm August 2, 2010

Anne wrote:

Randy, why did the water catch on fire? You haven't disclosed that.

2:26 pm August 3, 2010

Randy wrote:

As I mentioned several times, in situation like that the gas should be collected and tested to see if it's from the deep formation. In the cases I'm aware of, the gas turned out to be from the shallow formation of the water well. "Swamp gas" is another example of the shallow ("biogenic") natural gas.

9:19 pm August 23, 2010

Rig #5 wrote:

When i watched this show i had to watch it in 5 segments, mainly because i wanted to smash the tv! Not because of the alleged problems but the lies that went with it. These people that were interviewed in there homes looked like they had received some nice royalty checks for one, the water burning in the sink, amazing what coal methane will do. I have been raised in the oil and gas patch, plan to continue raising my family in the patch, oh my grandfather is 88 and spent most of his adult life in the patch and is one of the founding fathers of hydro fracing in the great state of Pa, and is healthy as a horse! According to this show he should of been dead years ago. One final thought have fun driving to work, and staying warm in the winter this year. Oh and when you get to the local walmart remember how it got there! Also look up at the lights that are probably being lit by electric being made made by natural gas. Think people!

10:21 pm August 24, 2010

Susie wrote:

Time to wake up America, This guy was honest to a fault, how anyone can say this is untrue they must be getting paid off by corp. Anyone can check out these facts directly. Stop following the herd, speak up, do something. before its to late. We seem to let the media run our lives with bias reporting, Why is this not on every front page? We need a change, like honestly, in reporting the news. Spread the word, after all we all need water to live.

10:39 am August 25, 2010

Randy wrote:

Susie - please list what you consider the top 3 'facts', and I'll address them directly and factually.

Again, I challenge those who support Natural Gas to drink the water in the areas where they have been impacted by Natural Gas operations. Perhaps you should also offer to buy their properties and live there, since you claim that it is COMPLETELY SAFE. You guys won't because you know that those water samples came back with more than just naturally occurring chemicals. You can see that it is making people and animals sick. Folks who run these operations and those who support natural gas do not have to live with its consequences, so it is easy for them to parrot some talking points from a PR firm from Big Energy. Big Energy never lies to us do they -- NOT.

7:36 pm December 6, 2010

kh wrote:

dear liberal fox, when will you realize that not being dependent on foreign energy is a GOOD thing? Talk about living in a bubble, you have certainly been brainwashed. GO NATURAL GAS!!!!!!!!

3:54 pm December 19, 2010

ODNRSTINKS wrote:

As someone who has had this happen to them you can not beleave how corrupt our goverment is ! Columbia Gas came out and shut my services off saying it wasnt a matter of if but when my house blows up! And they did'nt wanted to be envolved . My wellhead was 100% LEL all it needed was and ingnition source.

7:21 pm January 14, 2011

NB wrote:

There are two different types of fracking. Vertical and Horizontal. Horizontal fracking is fairly new and very destructive towards the enviornment. A lot of you are commenting on the review without watching the movie. Give it a watch

12:39 pm January 17, 2011

Alex wrote:

Josh Fox is an American hero imho, and so are others liike him, who have the courage to rufflle the feathers of those corporate interests that are destructive to the health and well-being of The People and our beloved land & country. Chief Sealth once said: we belong to the land, the land does not belong to us...
It's distressing to learn how wide-spread and brazen corporate thuggery really is and the power these lying frackers and their facilitators in high places wield over the lives of ordinary Americans!

12:52 pm January 17, 2011

Alex wrote:

I forgot to mention, that in view of laissez-faire capitalism run-amok w the complicity of government turning a blind eye and underfunding its agencies charged w oversight,
#1. these practices must be exposed and halted at once. The public deserves to be fully informed.
#2. The deliberate perpetrators of these evil practices must be held accountable, legally AND financially!

6:54 pm February 5, 2011

Mrs. Jones wrote:

Outstanding documentary. Josh Fox should get an award for this production.
May these bastards have to drink what they produce! Everyone should write to congress over and over until someone listens. Don't vote for anyone who wants to deregulate and gets paid off by lobbiest.

7:37 pm February 8, 2011

Ray wrote:

I live in Southwestern Pennsylvania.A number of Frack wells have been popping up around the area.I have become very concerned about our Government's (State and Local )unwillingness to investigate or even do a study on this type of drilling.I have also learned that if our State or Local Government stands to make a lot of money,public safety is not an issue.

9:38 pm February 8, 2011

Josh Fox should have been on a bicycle wrote:

Here is just another fool driving around in a car complanping abot how we get our energy, Can someone tell me why he wasn't on a bike!!!. And I wonder just what he heats his home with. I work in the area and in the field he was doing the movie about. He fits right in with John stewert two morons with no real idea what is going on. I really do hope we have reached peak oil and that we run out soon that way we can watch people like John Stewert and Josh Fox wither away and die due to the lack of things they need to live . Movie stars will have all the money and it wont be worth the paper its printed on. The real people who can live off the land will be the only ones to keep going on and the people likeJjohn Stewert and Josh Fox who need to get their food from the big city stores will die and just go away. These two people like so many others just dont get it when the oil is taken away from them they will then find out how much of their lives depend on it. And with-out it they will cese to exsist!

4:59 pm February 23, 2011

cathy wrote:

to the feb 8, 2011 @9:38 comment, well, lets wait and see how you and your family are affected. lets wait and see the illnesses you come down with and then see if you still think Josh is nuts. Arent' you concerned with the enviroment? whats your deal? we heat our home not thinking the government is allowing toxins to affect us. WTF....come back in a few months or a year and hope to God you don't come down with ailing ailments!!!!!!! open your mind!!!!

9:31 am March 3, 2011

Shawn wrote:

It's happening here in W.V. as they work all around here trying to get those dollars form the ground, Kind of strange that just before they really started drilling around here that they encouraged every one with wells to get city water. Coincidence or do they know something they are not telling us

6:33 pm March 9, 2011

Randy wrote:

Latest factual news: the water wells in Parker county Texas that were claimed to be affected by fracturing of Barnett shale wells were found not to be affected at all by those wells. But facts have little to do with people's outrage, I've seen...

5:09 pm April 13, 2011

Neutral wrote:

Please please please check your facts before you buy into the hype. Just like anything (driving, flying, cooking, etc.) natural gas drilling has its risks and just b/c this guy made a "documentary" (with some questionable facts that, thus far, don't seem to have any scientific basis) does not mean they are true. Yes, there have been incidences. But like I stated above, there have been issues with planes, trains, and automobiles and last I checked, we were still flying, riding, and driving and always striving to make things safer and better. EDUCATE yourself and make thoughtful, informed decisions based on the facts, not fear.

3:06 pm April 22, 2011

Paul wrote:

Neutral: Please please please check your conscience. "Yes, there have been incidences." I think what you mean is, "yes, there have been incendiaries." Funny that you start out saying to check your facts and end saying, essentially, to ignore them because we need energy. Is that what you tell someone whose faucets ignite, whose land is now worthless, and whose family and livelihood are now compromised by sickness and contamination?

Paul, thank you for posting that link. The nytimes article debunks many of Gasland's claims. Good work!

3:43 pm June 16, 2011

Petar wrote:

I have recently watched a clip in which Fox is answering questions regarding his movie. One of the questions is regarding the lighting of the water, a question which points out a report existed in 1976 which stated that there was methane in the water in that area. Fox's response? The report is not relevant. Well, excuse me, but if one claims to be a journalist after the truth, wouldn't he disclose the information from the report? He admits that he is aware of the report but claims it's not relevant, misrepresenting the facts and causing the people to grow angry based on incomplete information. I find his 'journalism' and 'truth' to be an embarrassment.

And yes, there are risks involved with drilling. But so are there risks with solar and wind energy. Maybe the 'green energy' proponents should spend more time thinking about the infrastructure such as exorbitant amounts of space solar cells and wind turbines need to provide sustainable energy. It's fine to have a solar panel or two when you want to power your hosue, but what about streets, factories, offices, industrial parks? And do you realize just how much steel is involved in building the wind turbines?

I think the problem, the only risk, involved with the drilling is irresponsible behavior by the driller who wants to get home to watch his favorite episode of Dancing with the Stars so he doesn't cement the well casing like he should. But you know what, irresponsible behavior will happen, regardless of industry, whether it's oil and gas, wind, sun, nuclear (ahem, Japan?) and we need to stop trashing the oil and gas industry just basing our 'facts' on information provided by the unreasonable environmentalists, but instead we need to spend some time researching what actually happens. And I say unreasonable environmentalists because I have met environmentalists who are very much in favor of drilling as long as done responsibly because it does lessen our dependence on foreign oil and it does boost our economy.

Isn't it so easy to dismiss the negative effects of hy fracking when its not you being directly affected?.... that's what bothers me about all the people who say that this is not a serious issue.... here's a question... would you drink the water from any of the homes that where in the Gasland film?... I think I know the answer... here's another one.... if your health was failing after wells were introduced into your immediate area, or maybe your children were getting cancer or other serious ailments, AFTER the wells were introduced or re-ignited for use... would you care then?... profit over people, the one thing that will bring this from a complaint into a full blown revolution... and for some of you, you should be ashamed of yourselves for your callousness

6:02 pm April 22, 2013

Scott wrote:

One last thing debunkers..... what is the thing that is essential to life?... is it money?... is it natural gas?...no, it's water.... where exactly are people supposed to get potable water from if we destroy all the viable sources?.... one more question?... the long term effect of horizontal drilling used in the hydraulic fracking process has NO long term data.... no one in the industry can tell you if will destroy drinking water supplies in the future, because it has not been used long enough to get that data.... so in another 20 years we could be facing a nationwide water shortage which could result in the biggest humanitarian crisis in US history... but hey, as long as people are getting paid it's fine, right?.... water is the most fundamental element needed for survival, and yet we take it for granted for the sake of the all holy economy...... mark my words people, the worst wars in the history of humanity will be nothing compared to the wars of the future caused by overpopulation and the worldwide shortage of potable water and food supply.... it's inevitable

Add a Comment

Error message

Name

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

About Speakeasy

Speakeasy is a blog covering media, entertainment, celebrity and the arts. The publication is produced by Barbara Chai and Jonathan Welsh with contributions from the Wall Street Journal staff and others. Write to us at speakeasy@wsj.com or follow us on Twitter at @WSJSpeakeasy or individually @barbarachai.